Adding 2-Stroke oil to Diesel

[Krankin]

fact its the opposite, the DPF is doing less regen burns when using 2T.

where is the conclusive proof of that??


There is no reason for there to be (ZDDT) zinc additives in 2T.....remember, 2T is designed for 2cycle engines,
NOT,
four cycle flat tappet old tech engines that need the additive

 

[KraftyPg]

the DPF is doing less regen burns when using 2T.

Totally agree with Krankin where is the proof. 99% of small diesel owners don't even know when a regen happens let alone being able to tell conclusively whether there is more or less regens happening.

 

[tweak'e]

Krankin and Kraftypg......just need a third LOL

some vehicles have DPF light on the dash which comes on when regening and also the improvement to fuel economy.

could be no ZDDP in 2T but no one would know as nothing is listed. just using it as an example as there are several others they don't use in motor oil now. every manufacture is different in what additives they put in.

 

[KraftyPg]

some vehicles have DPF light on the dash which comes on when regening and also the improvement to fuel economy.

So where is that actual proof that these cars with DPF lights that illuminate to tell the driver a regen is happening are requiring less regens with a bit of oil in the fuel? And proof isn't a few web pages with stories on them, proof is in the practice, there is enough DPF fitted Nav's on this forum, is there some proof floating around that all those vehicles are doing less regens than the DPF fitted Nav not using oil?

 

[tweak'e]

your asking for laboratory scientific data on a forum ??? keep stroking it.

 

[KraftyPg]

Anyone in their right mind who has read this thread gave up asking for laboratory proof on page 1 because there is none to be had. I'm stroking for proof that there is less regens of a DPF because of the use of oil in the diesel. Surely there is enough DPF fitted Navs to provide atleast an argument for the case you claim is there.

 

[Krankin]

Krankin and Kraftypg......just need a third LOL

some vehicles have DPF light on the dash which comes on when regening and also the improvement to fuel economy.

could be no ZDDP in 2T but no one would know as nothing is listed. just using it as an example as there are several others they don't use in motor oil now. every manufacture is different in what additives they put in.

well Penrite for example dont have ZDDP in their 2stoke oil but do to varying %'s some engine oils.....and they state the mass% of zddp.

 

[Old.Tony]

I can't help with the "less regens due to using oil" either. My DPF light works - it comes on before my engine has started - but I've never once noticed my DPF light coming on. I'm almost positive that in over 80,000km it MUST have done at least one regen - but no light.

However, as I've documented before, I've noticed a trend of lower fuel consumption after adding the 2T oil to the fuel. It's not a lot, might amount to the cost of a couple of litres per tankful (standard tank size).

And, as I've said before, the difference that I've seen so far is small enough to make it something that I can do or not without concern or fear of loss. Using it has done nothing detrimental, but I've got very little actual proof that it's done a lot.

So, the best thing I COULD say is this:

I've used it, and it has not caused any negative effects that I've been able to discern.

 

[KraftyPg]

Any negative effects that you know of.

 

[Old.Tony]

Absolutely - I will make that correction.

 

[johnbritto]

if anyone is worried about cloging up the cat . its simple remove the bugger, you will have lower EGT and better economy without it anyway probably better sound and performence to. i know it probably wont be legal but i recon ill still get a pink slip

 

[FatBoy89]

How does a 15,000 fine sound?

 

[Krankin]

if anyone is worried about cloging up the cat . its simple remove the bugger,

I like the idea.........should I or shouldn't I....Hmmmmmm


I reckon its a winner tho, beats puttin 2T in the fuel.

 

[johnbritto]

How does a 15,000 fine sound?

ive taken plenty cars for a pink slip and never had the cat checked tyres lights horn breaks thats about it and i cant see the epa pulling over a car thats in good shape just to ckeck if it has a cat or not. you wont blow any more smoke with or without so ill run the risk of a fine i already have my excuse ready, it was like it when i got it and it passed rego inspection.

 

[KraftyPg]

So what will your excuse be when the insurance company says they wont pay out after an accident. The CAT while unlikely to cause an accident is something insurance assessors are bound to pick up when looking over the car for reasons not to pay up and pleading ignorance (or stupidity in this case given you've just admitted to the removal on a public forum) doesn't work when an insurance company wants to save cash.

Risk vs effort, for those that think the risk is worth it fine but expect laughter and berating if you come back here throwing up rant threads about insurance company's not paying out or over zealous road corps fining for missing parts.

 

[Jason]

So what will your excuse be when the insurance company says they wont pay out after an accident. The CAT while unlikely to cause an accident is something insurance assessors are bound to pick up when looking over the car for reasons not to pay up and pleading ignorance (or stupidity in this case given you've just admitted to the removal on a public forum) doesn't work when an insurance company wants to save cash.

Risk vs effort, for those that think the risk is worth it fine but expect laughter and berating if you come back here throwing up rant threads about insurance company's not paying out or over zealous road corps fining for missing parts.

Errr? What?

So the people running HID globes risk not getting paid out for a daytime accident as well (I could understand an accident at night)? EGR block???

I'm not for cat removal, but as if insurance companies would give a toss.

 

[KraftyPg]

This forum alone is full of people bitching about how car manufacturers avoid warranties when we do things that aren't roadworthy and now you're suggesting that insurance companies don't give a toss about unroadworthy cars, yeah right.

Again it's all about levels, sure if you bend a few fenders and claim a small amount chances are there will be no issue, have a large accident where you are at fault and there is heaps of damage or worse a death and they check the car over and they find it to be unroadworthy they have the right not to pay. That's why insurance companies have fine print.

 

[Jason]

I agree that removal makes a car unroadworthy, but it needs to be proven that it contributed to the accident.

I can see the report now, "The removal of the catalytic convertor increased the exhaust emissions of the vehicle in front, this caused excessive eye watering of the driver of the trailing vehicle and he subsequently ran up his ass". Really?

 

[KraftyPg]

No it doesn't have to be proven to have done squat.

Any insurance company is within their rights to refuse a payout if the car is unroadworthy as knowingly driving an unroadworthy car or modifying it such that it is unroadworthy is a breach of your insurance terms. It's got nothing to do with blame, that's for the coppers to sort out.

 

[Jason]

So the people running HID globes risk not getting paid out for a daytime accident as well (I could understand an accident at night)? EGR block???

So this is a worry too?

Got any proof (heard this before) of the above, or of a person knowingly removing a cat having a claim rejected?